E-books may take a page out of digital music’s book

The International Digital Publishing Forum is considering a lightweight DRM.

On Friday, an association of e-book publishers—including major companies such as Harper Collins, Random House, and Barnes & Noble—issued a statement suggesting an outline for a new “Lightweight DRM.” This proposed Digital Rights Management standard could increase interoperability of books on hardware like e-readers.

Don’t get excited yet—the outline was only an invitation to a conversation that the association, called the International Digital Publishing Forum, wants to have. Still, it suggests the traditionally conservative publishing industry is learning how to do business in the Internet era. Hopefully, publishing is realizing something that the music industry has known for years: DRM is dead.

Of course, publishers aren't giving up entirely on DRM yet—they just want a different kind. But the IDPF suggested version of content management doesn’t require a lot of proprietary hardware or software to decrypt e-books (like the system we have today). In DRM’s current incarnation, books bought on a Kindle won’t work on a Nook, and books purchased on a Nook won’t work on a Kobo.

In the Friday statement, prepared by Bill Rosenblatt of Giant Steps Media Technology Strategies, the IDPF said a lightweight DRM option would lower production costs in terms of providing secure hardware and robust software. It would also reduce intensive client-server interactions. And of course, the IDPF suggested a new format would be favorable to consumers because it would be easier to use and understand.

The IDPF also said that content distributors (like Amazon and Barnes & Noble) are not clearly gaining when publishers use content protection. DRM, "is subject to a single over-arching limitation: the entities that want DRM (i.e., publishers and copyright owners) do not typically pay for it," Rosenblatt wrote for the IDPF. "Instead, the cost of DRM is usually passed on to content distributors and retailers. Apart from its use for 'lock-in,' these downstream entities have no incentive to protect content other than as a contractual obligation to content licensors. Thus it is understandable that distributors and retailers have been highly reluctant to pay for DRM-related features that do not directly benefit them."

Earlier this year, J.K. Rowling released her Harry Potter series without a heavy DRM standard—instead the books are digitally "watermarked", by stamping the user’s name and the time of purchase. That way, people who share the books illegally are theoretically traceable. People who want to lend the book to friends, or read the same book across many devices, have that freedom. Science fiction publisher Tor Books, which is owned by publishing giant Macmillan, recently ditched DRM as well.

This publisher resistance to heavy-duty content restrictions is not really about goodwill as it is about good business. It seems more people will buy e-books if they can transfer them between devices, or if DRM was easier to understand. At a recent conference held by the Digital Public Library of America, Internet Archive founder Brewster Kahle answered an audience member who asked “what will it take for publishers to nix DRM?”

”Wanting to have a business at the end of the day?” Kahle answered sarcastically.

The new DRM that Rosenblatt and the IDPF suggested would involve more than simple watermarking, which is not totally protected by laws that prevent the circumvention of a copyright holder’s protections. The IDPF proposal would involve fewer restrictions than the varied proprietary encryption processes that pepper publisher content today. Rosenblatt often referenced PDF as an example of a format that lightly encrypts the document and prevents users from making modifications. That’s not to say the IDPF imagines that any new specifications would be enough to deter piracy: "To be very clear on this point: we expect that a lightweight DRM (in reality, any DRM) will be cracked, and we are relying on anticircumvention law for some level of crack protection," the statement read.

The IDPF noted that it would prefer to build the new format out of existing technologies, but would consider building an entirely new format altogether if there were interest. And, if such a standard were agreed upon, content distributors and reading system suppliers would be required to license the EPUB LCP [Lightweight Content Protection] format before getting access to the specifications. So there’s no telling if a new format would actually reform the fractured DRM system, as publishing companies would have to scrap their current DRM system and license the new one first. The Forum is currently requesting comments from "members and interested parties."

As long as there still is an actual DRM, my reaction to this kind of thing is a resounding "whatever".

The XKCD comic from the first post describes exactly what will happen.

To elaborate: for example I saw yesterday a blu-ray advertised as 3 in 1: DVD+BluRay+Ultraviolet. It actually took me a few seconds to remember what the heck IS the "Ultraviolet" thing. I'm expecting more or less the same outcome to happen here.

Yeah, except that a "lightweight" DRM that would work on multiple types of e-readers would actually be a win for consumers and possibly the publishing industry, as the article points out. So it probably /would/ gain traction. I would mind DRM on my eBooks a lot less if I knew I wasn't locked into a particular e-reader.

I wouldn't say that this is any indication they're seeing the light just as the music industry did, nor is it a revelation that they should be kinder to their customers. It's simply a reaction to Amazon.

I have book purchased from google and Borders on my Nook, I didn't have to strip DRM or anything of the sort. The Nook will allow me to read any book I can find in an EPUB format. You want interoperability, it's here. https://blogs.adobe.com/digitalpublishi ... ed-devices Amazon is the only one that holds out with it's own special format.

If they dont restrict my right to put an ebook on however many and whichever devices I want, then I dont have any issue with a light encryption. (Although personally I will always prefer an actual book in my hands)

That watermarking is an interesting way of doing things too. I mean you can get around it(blur/blackout the watermarks?) so its probably just more annoying than anything else to always see your user name on every page, but its still interesting.

I have book purchased from google and Borders on my Nook, I didn't have to strip DRM or anything of the sort. The Nook will allow me to read any book I can find in an EPUB format. You want interoperability, it's here. https://blogs.adobe.com/digitalpublishi ... ed-devices Amazon is the only one that holds out with it's own special format.

Try to use a Nook ebook with DRM in other readers, try to use an Apple iBooks ebook in other readers.

The problem is not the format, the problem is the DRM and Amazon, Apple and B&N have non standard DRM's

Any sort of DRM, Content locking to a single device, Geoblocking, Regional encoding and all such schemes. Will simply result in ZERO eReader/eBook purchases by me and my household. DO NOT WANT.

What I do want, is a single format that I can purchase once, and legally use between ALL of my personal devices within my own LAN at my convenience. EndOf.

Content providers need to realize this is non-negotiable indelible factor. This also applies to methods of transport between my array of personal devices by cable connection or media transfer, be it a laptop, netbook, smartphone, tablet, HDTV, home server or any other device owned by my own household.

Content providers need to realize the average homebody isn't going to run a duplicator machine and multicopy hundreds of thousands of copies for retransmision to the rest of the world. There simply isn't a need to waste bits on such things. Instead focus your enforcement and ligitation efforts on large scale criminal enterprise and leave the common ordinary homebody out of it.

Don't become another greed driven media-nazi like the MPAA & RIAA. We will not tolerate it. Find a better amicable solution for the good of all.For those of you who haven't yet, Please read: Richard Stallman's The Right To Read (1997) http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

If I can't crack the DRM on an e-book, I'm not buying it. Watermark away, though. I don't intend to post my e-books on the open web.

Calibre is a wonderful piece of software for transparently converting between e-book formats, and there are plugins that strip away the DRM just as easily.

The problem with what I'm doing is that it's technically illegal, just like ripping my DVDs. I am not wronging anyone, unless you think it's Amazon's right to force me to buy a Kindle device just to read their books, when my nook will suffice once their DRM is gone.

I'm all for simplifying the DRM fragmentation that currently exists in the market, even if it only applies to the ePub format. The state of ePub needs fixing.

Either content has DRM, or it does not. What the hell are they talking about?

---

As for watermarking files, what is that supposed to accomplish? Considering how easy it would be to strip out such protection, it really provides no protection at all. About the only people that would punish would be people who are clueless enough to accidentally share the ebooks they have, rather then any person who is intentionally pirating.

"To be very clear on this point: we expect that a lightweight DRM (in reality, any DRM) will be cracked, and we are relying on anticircumvention law for some level of crack protection," the statement read.

Seems to defeat the purposes of DRM in the first place. Likely chances are people who takes the time and effort to crack the DRM isn't going to care much about the anticircumvention law in the first place.

...What I do want, is a single format that I can purchase once, and legally use between ALL of my personal devices within my own LAN at my convenience. EndOf.

Content providers need to realize this is non-negotiable indelible factor. This also applies to methods of transport between my array of personal devices by cable connection or media transfer, be it a laptop, netbook, smartphone, tablet, HDTV, home server or any other device owned by my own household.

Content providers need to realize the average homebody isn't going to run a duplicator machine and multicopy hundreds of thousands of copies for retransmision to the rest of the world. There simply isn't a need to waste bits on such things. Instead focus your enforcement and ligitation efforts on large scale criminal enterprise and leave the common ordinary homebody out of it.

While I agree with you on the desire, what the content providers do understand is that we are the smallest percentage of their purchasing population. Unless someone comes out with a single device that makes it trivial for the average person to use their media in the manner in which you describe they're not going to do it.

Most people will purchase the DVD (or Blu-Ray) to watch at home and if they decide they want to watch it on the go they'll pick it up on Netflix, Amazon or iTunes for a 2.99 (and up) rental. Other content they'll purchase specifically for portable devices and just plug that device into their tv via the front HDMI port and watch it on the TV that way.

Content providers are terrified of more people becoming like us. They don't care if we don't purchase their content because we are too small of a population. They do care about the average joe being enabled to act like us though, because in the end that means fewer re-sales (or rentals) on content.

As for watermarking files, what is that supposed to accomplish? Considering how easy it would be to strip out such protection, it really provides no protection at all. About the only people that would punish would be people who are clueless enough to accidentally share the ebooks they have, rather then any person who is intentionally pirating.

I think they mean watermarking but I agree that for ebooks (epubs) it's ridiculous. Epub is mostly html and you can strip any string out of there with ease. The Watermarking of m4as are different because - as I understand it - it relies on overlaying an unnoticeable wave pattern over the audio file which cannot be removed easily.

It has little to do with the DRM problem, but this might be a good time to remind everyone of the incredible resource that is Project Gutenberg! ( http://www.gutenberg.org/ ) And if you're into that sort of thing, the Petrucci Music Library ( http://imslp.org/ ) is no less impressive on the e-readers! And then there's good old random lecture notes ( http://www.nicadd.niu.edu/~bterzic/PHYS652/ ). Already have a huge number of documents on my new Kindle, and... no DRM.

I have book purchased from google and Borders on my Nook, I didn't have to strip DRM or anything of the sort. The Nook will allow me to read any book I can find in an EPUB format. You want interoperability, it's here. https://blogs.adobe.com/digitalpublishi ... ed-devices Amazon is the only one that holds out with it's own special format.

Actually, it's the other way around. Amazon's format pre-dates ePub by quite a bit. It was originally developed to support ebooks on PalmPilots, and ePub did not exist when the first kindle was released. It is not only just as open as ePub, but technologically almost identical.

The only thing keeping you from reading books purchased by one retailer on a reader produced by another is the DRM. Barnes & Noble is just as guilty as Amazon in that; their DRM is as different from Borders' as is Amazon's, and the only reason Borders' doesn't have their own is that they lack the market power to push it.

The IDPF also said that content distributors (like Amazon and Barnes & Noble) are not clearly gaining when publishers use content protection. DRM, "is subject to a single over-arching limitation: the entities that want DRM (i.e., publishers and copyright owners) do not typically pay for it," Rosenblatt wrote for the IDPF. "Instead, the cost of DRM is usually passed on to content distributors and retailers. Apart from its use for 'lock-in,' these downstream entities have no incentive to protect content other than as a contractual obligation to content licensors. Thus it is understandable that distributors and retailers have been highly reluctant to pay for DRM-related features that do not directly benefit them."

What about the obvious: in the digital age, there's no need for copyright holder, publisher, distributor and retailer to be separate entities? Once everybody accepts this, it will be much easier to come up with the proper solution (J.K. Rowling's).As an author, I can sell my books directly to the public. If copies show up on unauthorized sites, look at the watermark and go after the infringer. I know, it's not that easy, but it's much easier than the mess we;re in right now.

I have book purchased from google and Borders on my Nook, I didn't have to strip DRM or anything of the sort. The Nook will allow me to read any book I can find in an EPUB format. You want interoperability, it's here. https://blogs.adobe.com/digitalpublishi ... ed-devices Amazon is the only one that holds out with it's own special format.

Actually, it's the other way around. Amazon's format pre-dates ePub by quite a bit. It was originally developed to support ebooks on PalmPilots, and ePub did not exist when the first kindle was released. It is not only just as open as ePub, but technologically almost identical.

The only thing keeping you from reading books purchased by one retailer on a reader produced by another is the DRM. Barnes & Noble is just as guilty as Amazon in that; their DRM is as different from Borders' as is Amazon's, and the only reason Borders' doesn't have their own is that they lack the market power to push it.

Is this the case anymore? .mobi was a decent format, but it's incredibly old. After Amazon's acquisition of Mobipocket also is/was no guarantee that Kindle ".mobi" files would remain the same as standard .mobi. Further there's the information about Kindle Format 8. Granted it uses HTML5 and CSS, but doesn't have to conform to any existing ebook standards.

Another problem of having three formats (now) is that they don't have to operate similarly enough to allow the user to convert between them. Look at the brouhaha surrounding iBooks. Because Apple wants to create an artificial lock-in (besides their DRM) they have customized ePub in a proprietary manner. They had every chance to make use of ePub3 and its rich interactivity layer and contribute advances to the format, but instead they chose to fork it completely. Now besides DRM issues there are legitimate concerns about the possibility to being able to convert between formats for anything other than pure text-based books.

I think the format discussion is at [i[least[/i] as important to the discussion here as the DRM issue is. Right now it's not going to make much nevermind if Amazon, B&N and Apple all use different formats since you can't (legally) convert between them. If they all go DRM free it becomes the issue.

While the forcing of the Agency model on the industry was anti-competitive (and possibly illegal) publishers requiring that retailers use a single open standard would be the opposite. It would increase inter-operability as much as removing DRM would, and possibly far more than that down the road. It would also increase the number of people looking at how to add features to the standard and how best to go about adding those features. Yes, it would remove some of the control that the retailers have (and as such they'd likely fight it) but for the consumer it would be a massive win.

PLEASE do this! I don't care what formats were available first--all I know is that switching between devices is painful. I bought a Sony Reader about 6 years ago (before Kindle was even available) and when it came time to replace it I didn't have any other choices except to stick with Sony. In my mind, the device is the bookshelf--publishers shouldn't care if I want to move my books onto a different shelf.

As for DRM free books--I generally like political/spy thrillers (ala. Tom Clancy, Dan Brown, Steve Berry...). I don't believe there's much at Baen or Tor as they are predominantly sci-fi (please correct me if I'm wrong). Anyone know of other websites that sell DRM free thrillers?

It has little to do with the DRM problem, but this might be a good time to remind everyone of the incredible resource that is Project Gutenberg! ( http://www.gutenberg.org/ ) And if you're into that sort of thing, the Petrucci Music Library ( http://imslp.org/ ) is no less impressive on the e-readers! And then there's good old random lecture notes ( http://www.nicadd.niu.edu/~bterzic/PHYS652/ ). Already have a huge number of documents on my new Kindle, and... no DRM.

MusOpen also has a collection of sheet music (and recordings!) in the public domain. Librivox is a project that creates PD audiobooks from Project Gutenberg's collection with volunteer readers. There's Wikisource for print material of all kinds, and the Internet Archive for PD/open licensed media of every sort, from books to radio dramas to feature-length films. Watching old horror movies from the site has kind of become a Halloween tradition for my household.

This is obviously a pilot strategy for Macmillan and there's a good chance that all of Macmillan's imprints will go DRM-free in the near-future. So when one of the largest publishers is on the brink of dropping DRM why even bother with another scheme, 'lightweight' or not? This idea is insane.

Dropping DRM is the only way to produce universal interoperability (there are lots of people out there with old ereaders who shouldn't have to purchase yet another device to do the same thing), and the publishers' best hope at reducing the influence Amazon has on the market. Stross is right.

I promise you that Amazon doesn't want interoperability. They like their Kindle lock-in.

If you believe you know what Amazon wants, you are smarter than pretty much every other human being on earth. Amazon makes Apple look positively transparent in terms of company goals.

You can believe that Amazon's end game is being the world's sole important eBook seller, but it's just as likely that Amazon will happily sell non-DRM'd eBooks if the market is thereby grown twice as large. You may think the point of Kindle Fire and its successors is to sell eBooks, but for all we know, what Amazon really cares about is capturing web traffic --- or having a practice run at a phone --- or sewing up the OLTC market --- or using the stats about who reads what pages of each book and what they highlight and share to build an AI --- or ...Amazon is a riddle wrapped in an enigma inside a mystery, and it is foolish to pretend otherwise.

DRM only 'works' when it doesn't get in the users way. Always online connections, locks to specific devices etc - all are examples of failed DRM. If you're going to DRM fine. But do it correctly! Idiots.

Note: I am against all forms of DRM because I don't believe there is an example of good DRM anywhere in the world. Only lesser evils. Not to mention it is anathema to 'modern life'.

Look at the brouhaha surrounding iBooks. Because Apple wants to create an artificial lock-in (besides their DRM) they have customized ePub in a proprietary manner. They had every chance to make use of ePub3 and its rich interactivity layer and contribute advances to the format, but instead they chose to fork it completely. Now besides DRM issues there are legitimate concerns about the possibility to being able to convert between formats for anything other than pure text-based books.

Is this a REAL issue the way you have described it?I thought the issue was more that Apple has released a tool that creates this proprietary format. But nothing requires you to use that tool, and you want, you can certainly submit books to the iTunes store using the standard. If I am correct, then this is essentially like complaining that MS Word should create RTF files instead of docx files --- it may or may not be a valid complaint about a certain program and what is technically optimal, but it's a very different complaint from what we are discussing here.

And one of the insightful exchanges in the comments cuts to the heart of the piracy issue, too.

Charlie Stross wrote:

Quote:

Not that it really matters much given your target audience, but watermarking non-encrypted text content is basically useless as a piracy deterrent.

Define "piracy".Peanut Press had a successful way of watermarking ebooks back in the day. They'd be encrypted, and you needed to enter your key to decrypt them. Your key was ... the credit card number you'd paid with!Give that away on bittorrent, sucker.I don't think anyone in the publishing industry is seriously worried about you sharing an ebook you bought with your family or immediate friends. What they're worried about is two things. (a) Some dimwit uploads an ebook to bittorrent, potentially costing them sales. (I personally think this is an illusory problem -- most of those downloads aren't substitutes for actual sales, they're stamp-collecting or the equivalent of library loans: reads by people who would never have bought the book if that was the only way to get hold of it.) And (b) some malevolent person starts flogging copies as their own product.Most folks don't really understand enough about electronic goods to realize that if you upload a watermarked file, your name is attached to it. So there's an opportunity here for education: send the foolish file-sharers a nastygram and tell them not to do it again. It may also be useful in dealing with the greedy and stupid types who attempt to pirate ebooks for financial gain.Those who know enough to strip watermarking off a file are generally also less likely to take watermarking as be a personal affront. But they're a minority, anyway.

Anonymous While Admitting Piracy wrote:

Quote:

I personally think this is an illusory problem -- most of those downloads aren't substitutes for actual sales, they're stamp-collecting or the equivalent of library loans: reads by people who would never have bought the book if that was the only way to get hold of it.

And in fact it may drive sales. Because of the "fantasy" marketing I wasn't sold enough on the Merchant Princes books to buy them, though I would pick up book one and think about it in the bookstore every few months. And one night I wanted something to read and looked up your name on a torrent site and shortly had a big collection of works that I mostly already had, but which included the first three or so of the Princes books. Sorry, Charlie.I blew through the first in less than two days. I also later purchased the rest of them, including the final one in hardcover. I would never have bought any of them otherwise. So at least in my case, piracy actually created sales where I was unwilling to commit my money before.Why I ended up pirating the books is still a mystery to me, as the only other time I have pirated a book was an html file of Stephenson's The Big U way back when he insisted he would never allow it to be reprinted. But in this case everybody won: I got to enjoy a series I hadn't given a chance before and you and your publisher got a chunk of my cash.

Charlie Stross wrote:

Quote:

Why I ended up pirating the books is still a mystery to me, as the only other time I have pirated a book was an html file of Stephenson's The Big U way back when he insisted he would never allow it to be reprinted.

You answered your own question.Aside from the stamp collectors, piracy is mostly a symptom of a market failure -- demand for a product that is not being met at any reasonable price point (or at all) by the distribution chain.

This is one of the points he didn't really make strongly in the body of either post. It's probably something publishers don't want to hear or understand, but then again it may very well be what they need to hear and understand the most.

Is this the case anymore? .mobi was a decent format, but it's incredibly old. After Amazon's acquisition of Mobipocket also is/was no guarantee that Kindle ".mobi" files would remain the same as standard .mobi. Further there's the information about Kindle Format 8. Granted it uses HTML5 and CSS, but doesn't have to conform to any existing ebook standards.

I've written some personal scripts to parse html into both mobi and epub. The differences between them are pretty incidental, Mostly in where it keeps the metadata files, the actual markup of that metadata is the same.

I haven't looked at KF8 yet, and there's not much need for anyone making, you know, books to use it over mobi even to publish to Amazon.

Yeah, except that a "lightweight" DRM that would work on multiple types of e-readers would actually be a win for consumers and possibly the publishing industry, as the article points out. So it probably /would/ gain traction. I would mind DRM on my eBooks a lot less if I knew I wasn't locked into a particular e-reader.

How exactly that happen if for example Kindle reads ONLY mobi/azw/KF8(on K4 or later)also, if file can be converted by Calibre to format I want on reader I want - that's ok. if not - DRM causes problems (well, except that right now this can be done even with protected Kindle titles(if you have kindle for which book was bought))From time to time I see from some publishers(mainly for technical books,) more..good idea: near end of page, on each page 'This book was bought by <my name as on credit card,my e-mail>' and NO other protections.

btw,in my case, I bought books from Amazon even while I have them legally from other sources, thanks to whispersync.

If the DRM works transparently enough that I don't know it's there, then I'll accept it. But by definition, DRM is not meant to work that way, so no thanks. A simple watermark that stays out of the way might not be too awful, but that remains to be seen.

”Wanting to have a business at the end of the day?” Kahle answered sarcastically.

With such stupidity it will still take a long time. It is baffling to me that so many companies are willing to spend a lot of money on something that is easily demonstrated to be completely and totally ineffective...DRM is bad for business, it doesn't take a genius to realise that.